Factors Affecting Community Forest Management in Ha Giang Province, Vietnam45249

Factors Affecting Community Forest Management in Ha Giang Province, Vietnam Dao Thi Thu Trang (1)* (1) VNU Economic Business University, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Vietnam * Correspondence: daothutrang.pd@gmail.com Abstract: With the current deforestation in the world, to save the earth and forest resources, residents need to have a long-term strategy for their management and conservation A form of forests management that has been applied in Vietnam as well as several countries in Asia is model of community forests management This model was initially promoted its effectiveness in improving the lives of residents and restricting rampant logging, reducing forests over- exploitation Community forests management is a forest management methods based on traditional knowledge and experience of community aspirations, aims to enhance capacity and strengthen partnerships to share experience and community stakeholders in order to manage resources sustainably and contribute to improving the material life, spiritual, cultural and ethnic communities living in and near forests This study focused on the factors affecting the community forests management in Ha Giang through the subjective opinions of the respondents Then, it identifies what the factors that have been done better and the factors need to complete in order to improve the community forests management here From the data collected, tested scales, factor analysis, the paper has constructed a linear regression model The study results are also valid recommendations for organizations looking to develop appropriate strategies to achieve effective community forests management in Ha Giang Keywords: Community forests management; Likert 5; ANOVA analysis; Ha Giang; Vietnam Introduction In recent times, the developing countries in general and Vietnam in particular, forest resources have been reduced more in terms of quantity as well as quality So, countries face two problems such as poverty and the consequences of degradation of natural resources and the environment Since then, the policy and strategy development should be designed and implemented toward both objectives, which are reducing poverty and improvement of community life, sanitation and efficient use of natural resources So, management, protection and development of forest resources is an urgent task of the whole residents, as well as the government bodies from the central to local levels To protect, manage and development forest effectively requires the active participation of residents living near the forest In order to effectively manage and protect forests, there must be active participation of residents living near forests Village communities are self-governing social units that play a particularly important role in managing and protecting forests, especially community forests However, after implementing the Law on Forest Protection and Development, since 2004, village communities have not yet been fully recognized and access to the right to participate in the management, use, protection and development of community forests same as other forest owners Community forest allocation policies are still inadequate, making community forest management in localities in Vietnam difficult Ha Giang is a mountainous province borders the northern forest, its area for forestry development is 553,138.3 Currently, Ha Giang has 06 special-use forests, protected species and habitat areas With the first national location, the role of forests in Ha Giang is particularly important not only to preserve the environment and natural resources in Ha Giang in particular, but also for the whole country, especially the northern provinces Ha Giang Forest in one of the forests are to be managed, protected and developed For a long time, the life of the local population especially ethnic minorities has closed with forests, both materially and spiritually In the history of its development, the ethnic communities of Ha Giang province was aware of the benefits of forests and the need to protect the forest, which was formed by the customs, a sense of forest management, which guide and regulate human relations and community forests However, at present, deforestation and forest degradation in Ha Giang remains, requiring the need to have clear strategies to improve the management and protection of forests Therefore, it is necessary to study the factors affecting community forest management in Ha Giang so that local authorities have appropriate solutions to improve the effectiveness of forest management here Literature review 2.1 Concept 2.1.1 The concept of community In Vietnam, the concept of "community" is used in the forest management can be generalized into two categories the following key points: Firstly, the "community" is a collection of residents who live close together in a small society there are similarities in terms of cultural, economic, social traditions, customs, relations in production and life are often intertwined and spatial boundaries in a village According to this concept, "community" is the "village communities" (hereinafter "villages" are collectively referred to as "rural" in accordance with the Law on Forest Protection and Development (National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 2004) Second, the "community" is used in forest management is talking to groups of residents have relationships intertwined in the production and life Thus, according to this view, "community" is not only the community but also the entire village, including ethnic communities in rural areas; family or community groups in rural households Despite these different conceptions of community, but most of the comments were that "community" is used in forest management is talking to rural communities Article of the Law on the protection and development of forests in 2004 defines "Community is the whole village households and individuals living in the same village, hamlet, village, hamlet or single equivalent" (National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 2004) 2.1.2 The concept of community forest management The concept of community forest management has been discussed for decades, but in fact there have not been fully defined it On Asia forest network, the views of community forest management are generally seen as referring to the activities of the community towards the management and sustainable use of forest resources In the world, concept of community forest management was first held in 1978 by FAO in the world forestry conference That is "all forestry activities that community participate, including works in the garden, harvesting forest products for the needs of human life and planting trees at farms, production and processing of forestry products in households and cooperatives to increase income for the communities living near the forest." (FAO 1978) Quach Duong give a simple concept That is "process forest management, protection and development based on indigenous knowledge, traditional architecture, festivals and customary law of the community." Community forest management include activities of individuals and communities relating to forest management, protection and development (Duong 2005) Indeed, it is hardly for a full definition to reflect the reality of community forest management because natural conditions, economic and social in parts of the world is different So, the forms of community forest management also become very different In addition, the community forests management not only framed in community activities but also involve multiple stakeholders such as policy makers, government agencies, nongovernment agencies sponsorship and scientists The involvement of these organizations also impacts on process forest management and protection as well as economic conditions, social of communities Although not a completely accurate definition of community forest management, the process of developing forest communities in fact has not decreased Community forests management has been done for hundreds of years ago, and that was carried out before scientists mentioned Ecological and social effective of community forests have shown that community forest management is one of the logistic operations and most efficient in finding out the principles, the strategies employed the management, protection and development of forest resources (Poffenberger 2003) In terms of science, community forest management has only been known in the early 1970s, when droughts in African and floods in Asia have made forest resources seriously impaired Fuel for rural communities become increasingly difficult It was at this time the experience of community forest management in India (social forestry model), South Korea (village garden model), Thailand (the village forest model) and in Tanzania (the village plantation forest model) were interest by scientists in the world and they are considered as a solution to forest development and solving fuel in rural areas By the late 1970s, the concept of community forest management has been widely recognized worldwide In 1978, World forestry Congress has taken the title as "community forests" to honor and promote community forest activities (Arnold and Stewart 1991) In the 1980s, the forest development project has been expanded to communities around the world, particularly in India and Nepal The name of the community forest also changes as "Join Forest Management"; "Social Forestry", "Community Based Forest Management" However, the nature of the community forest management has not changed, it is the process in which the residents are center in forests management, protection and development At the end of the 1980s and 1990s, scientists focus more on research institutions in community forest management, including institutional traditions and institutions of the state, in order to create a legal framework for the development of community forests In this stage, the concept of ownership is given to discuss a wide range, including state ownership, private ownership, community ownership and use freely For a while the community forest concept was criticized vehemently on the views of Hardin in "The Tragedy of common ownership" that the community ownership of forests is synonymous with liberal use It is a form of use that every member wants to take maximizing general benefits for themselves, thus forest was over exploited (Hardin 1968) Contrary to Hardin, Arnold and Jongma suggest that forest communities bring greater efficiency in forest development and community development They stressed that the community forest is an integral component of rural development, which targets mainly aimed at helping poor communities to sustain themselves and grow their life So, forest community is for the residents and there is residents’ participation in management and development (Arnold and Jongma 1978) With a view like that, they has pointed out three basic goals of the community forest is (1) providing fuel and other vital supplies to serve the basic needs of the community, (2) providing sustainable source of food and habitat for a process of continuous food production, and (3) having income, resolving employment for local residents Burda et al also acknowledged the community forest management that: "The longer residents live in the forest have special knowledge about the local ecology and the long-term impact of forest on the social, environmental to their lives The centralization of bureaucratic management systems lacks the flexibility and ability to adapt to the real conditions of different localities (Burda et al 1997) While community forest management helps residents to live closer to nature and thereby establish the institutions, plans to use forest management and a more efficient manner Community forest management has created a system responsive to rapid decisionmaking and action to adapt to the changes of specific conditions The decision to meet the interests of the entire community, those directly responsible for making those decisions." Herb also gave arguments favor community forest management that "forest management by communities create opportunities to find solutions that without in centralized power system The process of planning and action are integrated a responsible manner because they are done at the same place and by the community." (Herb 1991) Despite the debate, the community forest has developed naturally and quickly Many parts of the world have been accepted it and is seen as an important strategy in the management, protection and development of forest resources Community forest management is not new in Vietnam Many studies have shown the existence of traditional forest management by mountain communities in different places across the country With forest allocation policy since the early 1990s and the support of development projects in the country in the forestry sector, the involvement of local communities in forest management has more and more increase Community forest management is a form of traditional forms of management in the mountainous region of Vietnam ago The Vietnam ethnic communities with different scales: tribe, clan, village played a vital role both the forests management and protection and residents use forest resources logically with conventional community Ethnic use forest resources to serve their life: wood, bamboo for houses, firewood, mining rattan bamboo housewares and collectibles crops cure patient experience of traditional folk So far, in Vietnam, in terms of both theory and practice, the community forest management has been recognized Code management, protection and development of forests in 2004 has confirmed community ownership for forests and which there were regulations on forests allocation for village communities In the highlands, especially ethnic minorities, community forest management is performed by "sacred forest", "ghost forest", "family group forest" These forests are managed by residents, protection fairly closely and effectively From the contents of the above definitions, one can see the forest management community is shown on content * The members of the community participate in business and management forests which belong to the general public (state- owned or assigned according to tradition) This management is directly * Community manage forests owned by the state organization through contracts Participation in the management directly related to community life such as employment, income, products harvested or enjoy the benefits of forests and other benefits cannot be calculated (such as watershed protection, creed, monuments ) Community can join the general management of private forest patches are delivered to every household in the community to achieve high efficiency in management The management is considered indirect management 2.2 The role of community forest management * The community can protect forests more effectively than households (at the study sites showed that the area of forest managed by community are currently not want to divide the household, because most forests are located in remote places village, when the violation occurs in forests, households cannot solve When fire occurs, they can mobilize village all members of the community to help) And here is the method of forest management in terms of cost effectiveness, (requires less investment from the Government) that are all accepted and high environmental nature * Community organizations in the local village very closely, village leaders are elected democratically and receive state subsidies Most communities have local conventions (write a text and unwritten) and highly effective, showing the relationship of social ties of community members in a coherent way Mechanism of reward and punishment according to the conventions of the community proved very effective * Management of community forests to meet the demand for domestic water protection and agricultural production; environmental protection and beliefs; the wood used in the construction of public infrastructure (schools, clinics) as well as provide agricultural parts contribute to improving life for residents in the community The residents in the community that for each root in management, and exchange experiences in production 2.3 Factors affecting the community forest management 2.3.1 Community forests management Policy * Government Policy Based on practical issues happening in the economy, government policies such as orientation, measures, actions of government to solve problems, towards common development goals and the effect of economic activity Government policies greatly influence the management of community forests When the government recognized the village community, which means they are an organization that has legal status and is considered to be the object of state land and forests and the management, protection and local forest (Nguyen Van Them 2004) Generally, in terms of legal, forests allocation is handing local communities empowers management, use of assets attached on forest land Community residents have the right to manage, protect, develop and use a common interest in serving the community Government policies encourage the community forest community forest management will be done well and vice versa * Province Policy District’s policy is perspective, policy guidelines and action of the district authorities in order to achieve the goal of economic development - cultural - political - social District policy on forest management are the guidelines, action plans and methods on how to manage, protect, develop and use local forest district to achieve common development Because the forest is a nature resource, the efficiency forest management and harvesting will bring great benefit to the community The policy of the district has forests is also a great influence on the community forests management Sometimes, the district's policy not completely coincide with the government's policy There are government policies are proposed but not implemented in the district Conversely, cannot government policy but if the agency deems necessary local and efficiently, they can also make specific policy to encourage certain activities performed Therefore, the district's policy on forest management is a new local policy directly affects the activity in the forest district (Duong 2005) District policy encourages land and forest allocation, implementation of community forest management brings advantageous and effective Conversely, if the district does not have policies to promote community forest management, then this will work hard to survive 2.3.2 Understanding of residents in community forest management Residents’ understanding of forest management is that residents have sufficient information and knowledge needed to manage forests and their role in forest management Residents knowledgeable about forest management as they grasp the techniques and principles of exploitation and use of forest resources It also means knowing how to handle problems that occur on state forest deforestation, forest fires, forest regeneration (Poffenberger 2003) The more residents are knowledgeable about forest management, the more they that easily, they participate in community forest management and performance management 2.3.3 The coordination between state management agencies and residents in community forest management As forests are national resources and the existence of forests not only affects the lives of residents close to the forest, but also affect the environment and living conditions of the country Therefore, the state has always had an important role in forest management For community forest management, whether the residents directly managing the forest but still need close coordination between state management agencies and local communities This combination is shown in place: state agency entrusted to manage residents In addition, state agencies also act as a guide, technical advice on management, protection and development of forests, equipped with certain knowledge of the community It impacts positively on the management of community forests (Nguyen Ba Ngai 2009), Because community forest management is the shared responsibility and relies on the collective power to protect common resources, collaboration between residents, between residents in forest areas is very important Residents coordinate forest management and discipline in order to ensure certain forest management activities are carried out community constantly and fully and effectively This combination is that these residents together to protect the forest, when problems occur together, including handling the assignments clear and fair Thus, the close collaboration between residents in forest management has a positive impact on community forest management 2.3.4 Protective Equipment for forest management Protective equipment for the forest management is the equipment to be able to help residents handle problems that occur in forests with ease and convenience For example, the fire-extinguishing equipment when wildfire, protection devices, against those who deforestation, the media to update the public on forests and increase understanding of the residents equipment for forest management as the full implementation of forest management more effective For forest communities, when residents are well equipped with the protection of forest management activities and community good will (Swiss Association for Development and Cooperation 2005) 2.3.5 Traditional habits Residents in the nearby forest where there are often living habits of different ways The traditional habits, the concept of forest management and use will affect the management of community forests The traditional habit of adjusting behavior affects residents and the residents involved in community forest management or not Traditional forest management of the various ethnic groups in Vietnam reflected in the custom of keeping forests, planting trees, building protection regulations and protection of trees of many villages Most early forest community recognition and self- managed communities traditionally well protected in accordance with customs and conventions (Ngai 2009), These forests have an important role in production, meaning life or spiritual, religious communities and for almost the entire community to decide on the management, protection and use of forests as well as benefits from forests 2.3.6 Benefit from forest management Residents see the benefit when they participate in forest management, they will be enthusiastic about the job and promote effective forest management Benefits from forest management as they are exploited forest use without affecting its long life and other residents Benefits are led participants to explore creative ways to enhance the quality of work Thus, the benefits from forest management to influence positive community forest management (Tuyen 2012) Methodology 3.1 Research model and hypothesis The research questions are: - What is the impact of factors on community forest management in Ha Giang? - What should Ha Giang provincial authorities adjust to improve the effectiveness of community forest management? Based on the research purpose, nine following research hypotheses are set out: * Hypothesis (H1): Government and local forest management policies that encourage forest land allocation and recognition of the role of communities in forest management will positively impact community forest management This effect is interpreted as the effect in the same direction * Hypothesis (H2): Residents’ understanding of forest management is that residents have sufficient information and knowledge needed to manage forests and their role in forest management When residents have an understanding of forest management, they will voluntarily protection and know how to effectively protect forests This active promotion of community forest management * Hypothesis (H3): State agencies have an important role in forest management orientation The combination of residents in forest management is very important Community forest management to achieve the effect by the large number of participants, the ongoing management and all problems are solved quickly and with resolve collective strength Want to get it there must be better coordination between the residents in the community forest areas The close collaboration between residents will impact positively on community forest management * Hypothesis (H4): Protective equipment have a positive impact to overall forest management and community forest management in particular Protective equipment to help solve the problems that occur in forests that are easy and more convenient * Hypothesis (H5): The traditional habit of the residents is a major influence on forest management If communities have traditionally love forests, forest protection, they will enthusiastically participate in forest management and vice versa * Hypothesis (H6): Benefits from the forest always attractive man When participating in forest management, both public defenders, both the mining and forest use Benefits from sustainable forests and as long as the community wishes to participate in forest management activities With the above hypotheses, the research model is set up as follows: Figure The conceptual model of the study 3.2 Observed variables From the theoretical basis, the observed variables of the model will be built as follows: Table 1: The observed variables of the research model Scale Policy on community forest management 1.1 The local Government recognizes community is an object allocated forest Code CS1 land and private forest owners as a way of actually promoting community forest management 1.2 Local government direct the model building and community forest policy CS2 and related activities to promote community forest management 1.3 Local government building regulations guiding protection and development of forest communities in promoting community forest management CS3 Residents’ understanding of community forest management 2.1 Residents’ understanding of their role in protecting the forests will HB1 promote community forest management 2.2 Residents understand the power of collective forest management will HB2 promote community forest management 2.3 Understanding techniques that use forest resources will impact positively HB3 on community forest management The combination of community forest management 3.1 Agency support state management, resident’s management and forest will PH1 impact positively on community forest management 3.2 Residents who work together will increase the effectiveness of community PH2 forest management 3.3 The combination of the residents to ensure forest management is ongoing PH3 and timely handling work Protective Equipment for the management 4.1 Protective Equipment facilitate community-based forest management TB1 4.2 Equipment protection reduces the risk of community-based forest TB2 management 4.3 Residents are equipped with full protective equipment for forest TB3 management have a positive impact to the management of community forests Traditional habits 5.1 The habit of sticking to the forest to promote community participation in TQ1 forest management 5.2 The traditional customs of the residents to respect and protect the forest TQ2 has promoted community participation in forest management Benefit from forest management 6.1 Join forest management can help residents exploit, income and other LI1 benefits from forests will promote community-based forest management 6.2 Residents are doing all participate in forest management while promoting LI2 community forest management 6.3 Forest management will keep the forest has not lost promote community LI3 forest management Community forest management 7.1 Quan Ba District, Ha Giang province has been implementing community QL1 forest management 7.2 Community Forest Management in Quan Ba, Ha Giang is very effective QL2 7.3 Residents in Quan Ba actively engaged in community forest management QL3 here 3.3 Questionnaires and evaluation scales 3.3.1 Questionnaire Furthermore, the author also applies reliability test analysis on organizational commitment, compensation management in the conceptual research model According to Hair et al (2011), reliability test analysis will provide to the researchers the level of reliability in the survey scale This analysis consists of statistical tests, including Cronbach’s alpha value should be higher than 0.6, Corrected Item-Total Correlation should be higher than 0.3, and Cronbach’s alpha if Item Deleted should be less than Cronbach’s alpha value in overall The last but not least is linear regression whether this data analysis techniques will provide to the researchers on how factors in conceptual research model relate with each other Finally, ANOVA analysis is applied in order to understand on how difference between respondents who have different characteristics in term of gender, age, marital status, and education toward organizational commitment, compensation management, and government officials’ performances Results 4.1 Statistical description 4.1.1 The independent variables Statistical results minimum value (Min) and maximum (Max) of each observed variable in Table 4.5 shows that the respondents evaluated for factors differ greatly That is the same speech, someone totally agree, but also completely disagree Lowest rating for the scale of the variable "policy on community forest management" (CS2), "The coordination of community forest management" (PH2) and was rated as the variable "Benefits from forest management" (LI2) Overall, the average value (mean) of the independent variables differ (mean = 2.86 3.65), this proves there is a different assessment of the level of importance between the independent variables Table 2: Descriptive statistics of factors affecting community forest management Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation CS1 153 3.50 0.762 CS2 153 2.86 0.892 CS3 153 3.19 1.005 HB1 153 3.56 0.931 HB2 153 3.61 1.047 HB3 153 2.98 0.949 PH1 153 2.93 0.882 PH2 153 2.86 0.869 PH3 153 3.02 0.790 TB1 153 2.96 0.785 TB2 153 3.11 0.748 TB3 153 3.04 0.751 TQ1 153 3.12 0.895 TQ2 153 3.24 0.903 LI1 153 3.32 0.893 LI2 153 3.65 0.963 LI3 153 3.08 0.977 QLR1 153 3.37 0.992 QLR2 153 3.24 0.953 QLR3 153 3.25 0.813 Valid N (listwise) 153 Considering the frequency of particular variables assessed, the value is expressed as follows: * Description of variable frequency "Policy on the community forests management " "Policy on the community forests management" variable is those respondents rated pretty high (mean from 2.86 to 3.5) This variable was assessed rather large difference between the observed variables Most respondents agreed that local government have recognized community is forest owners (accounting for 46.4%), only 5.3% did not agree that demonstrated community forest management has a very interesting here However, 38.5% said that local governments not have the leadership or clear policy to build a model community forest management and only guide the convention of forest protection, and development in communities Table 3: Description of the variable frequency “Policy on community forest management” Code CS1 Content The local Government recognizes community is an object Variable frequency (%) 0.7 4.6 48 36.6 9.8 allocated forest land and private forest owners as a way of actually promoting community forest management CS2 Local government direct the model building and 2.6 35.9 38.6 19.0 3.9 2.6 22.9 39.2 23.5 11.8 community forest policy and related activities to promote community forest management CS3 Local government building regulations guiding protection and development of forest communities in promoting community forest management * Description of variable frequency “Residents’ understanding of community forest management” 48.4% of respondents said that residents have an understanding of their role in forest protection and only 11.8% not agree with that Therefore, many residents who know the power of collective forest management (accounting for 54.2%) However, up to 30.1% on the evaluation of residents’ technical knowledge to use forest resources is not high In general, this can be seen that residents’ understanding of community forest management in Quan Ba District, Ha Giang Province is quite a lot This is a favorable factor for the development of community forest management The evaluation of observed variables HB1, HB2 have a high mean, respectively 3.56 and 3.61 Only observed variables HB3 have mean less than These statistics describe reasonably reflect the reality of Ha Giang residents’ understanding Table 4: Description of the variable frequency “Residents’ understanding of community forest management” Code Content Variable frequency (%) 11.8 39.9 29.4 19.0 HB1 Residents’ understanding of their role in protecting the forests will promote community forest management HB2 Residents understand the power of collective forest management will promote community forest management 2.0 13.1 30.7 30.7 23.5 HB3 Understanding techniques that use forest resources will impact positively on community forest management 5.9 24.2 39.9 26.1 3.9 * Description of variable frequency “The combination of community forest management” Residents think that state management agencies not support the residents to manager the forests (accounting for 37.3%) and only 24.8% agree with that In this variable, most of the respondents had neutral answers so they have not clearly commented Two observed variables (PH2 and PH3) are also disagreed by some respondents more This shows that generally, residents are not rated high in the coordination of community forest management Table 5: Description of the variable frequency “The combination of community forest management” Code Content Variable frequency (%) PH1 37.3 37.9 19.6 5.2 0.7 39.9 36.6 19.0 3.9 0.7 24.8 49.7 21.6 3.3 Agency support state management, resident’s management and forest will impact positively on community forest management PH2 Residents who work together will increase the PH3 The combination of the residents to ensure forest effectiveness of community forest management management is ongoing and timely handling work * Description of variable frequency “Protective Equipment for the management” The most obvious neutral views are showed in the descriptive statistics results for the “protective equipment for the management" variable The respondents could not be confirmed that the questionnaire identified yet In addition, some residents not agree and some who agree also nearly equal as confirmed above 22.9% of respondents agree that the protective equipment facilitates the community forests management and 28.8% of ones not agree with that Some argue that protective equipment reduces the risk of community forest management accounted for 26.1%, slightly higher than 19% of residents not agree with this Specifically, 25.5% said that residents were also equipped with protective equipment for forest management and this is a favorable factor for community forest management in Ha Giang Table 6: Description of the variable frequency “Protective Equipment for the management” Code TB1 Content Protective Equipment facilitate community-based Variable frequency (%) 0.7 28.1 48,4 20,3 2,6 19.0 54.9 22.2 3.9 22.2 51.6 23.5 2.0 forest management TB2 Equipment protection reduces the risk of community-based forest management TB3 People are equipped with full protective 0.7 equipment for forest management have a positive impact to the management of community forests * Description of variable frequency “Traditional habits” People in Ha Giang also appreciated the traditional habits in forest management high The means of two variables 2.96 and 3.11 are not too high but represent the recognition of the local people’s habit of sticking to forests 30.7% of respondents said that the local people’s habit of sticking to the forest have promoted community participation in forest management Only 18.3% of respondents said that the people’s traditional customs to respect and protect the forest will not motivate people to participate in community forest management That means the fine people's tradition of protecting forest has great influence on ideas and willing to participate in the forest management Table 7: Description of the variable frequency “Traditional habits” Code TQ1 Content The habit of sticking to the forest to promote Variable frequency (%) 1.3 23.5 44.4 23.5 7.2 2.6 15.7 44.4 29.4 7.8 community participation in forest management TQ2 The traditional customs of the people to respect and protect the forest has promoted community participation in forest management * Description of variable frequency “Benefit from forest management” "Benefit from forest management" variable was the highest rated and most homology among the independent variables Most respondents agreed that benefits attract everyone involved forest management Only 17.7% said that participating in forest management, people cannot exploit, get income or benefit from forest Similarly, up to 51% of the respondents said that people would be owners when participating in forest management The only observed variable LI3 was agreed and disagreed equivalently Local people are quite confused whether forest management keep the forest is not lost or not Table 8: Description of the variable frequency “Benefit from forest management” Code LI1 Content Join forest management can help people exploit, Variable frequency (%) 0.7 17.0 41.8 30.7 9.8 10.5 38.6 26.8 24.2 23.5 41.8 22.2 8.5 income and other benefits from forests will promote community-based forest management LI2 People are doing all participate in forest management while promoting community forest management LI3 Forest management will keep the forest has not 3.9 lost promote community forest management 4.1.2 The dependent variable According to Table 9, the observed variables in scale “community forest management” have high average values (Mean = 3.37, 3.24, 3.25) The average values were similar and not much difference in the independent variable The majority of respondents were neutral answer at the number of comments but agreeing with the statement more than disagreeing opinions 43.8% of respondents agreed with the statement “Ha Giang province has been implementing community-based forest management” and is only about 20% not agree with that opinion However, only 34.7% said that community forest management in Ha Giang is very effective, 45.1% could not identify it Likewise, 34% of respondents said that Ha Giang’s people actively involved in community forest management here, the number of people disagree quite low, only 14.4% and is largely the is neutral Thus, we can see, the community forest management in Ha Giang Province has been quite a lot of interest, however, the results have not really brought outstanding Table 9: Description of the variable frequency “Community forest management.” Code QLR1 Content Ha Giang province has been implementing Variable frequency (%) 1.3 19.0 35.9 29.4 14.4 2.0 18.3 45.1 22.9 11.8 1.3 13.1 51.6 27.5 6.5 community forest management QLR2 Community Forest Management in Ha Giang is QLR3 People in Ha Giang actively engaged in very effective community forest management here 4.2 Assessment Scale The survey was carried out to assess the reliability of the scale by Cronbach's Alpha coefficient of the questionnaire First of all, using Cronbach's Alpha coefficient for the variable type mismatch The scale is accepted as reliable Cronbach's coefficient alpha of 0.5 or higher and will type the variable correlation coefficients as low gross for Cronbach's Alpha coefficient unsatisfactory Results are presented in Table 10 The results showed that the scales have Cronbach's alpha coefficients greater than 0.6> 0.5 So, scales are built pretty well Table 10: Cronbach's Alpha Inspection Code Scale Variables Cronbach’s Alpha Comment coefficient CS Policy on community forest HB People's understanding of community 0.734 Good 0.604 Good 0.672 Good 0.688 Good management forest management PH The combination of community forest management TB Protective Equipment for the management TQ Traditional habits 0.710 Good LI Benefit from forest management 0.703 Good QLR Community forest management 0.603 Good * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "policy on community forest management" Table 11: Reliability for the scale “Policy on community forest management" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted CS1 6.05 2.715 0.547 0.670 CS2 6.69 2.319 0.573 0.629 CS3 6.36 2.021 0.574 0.639 Observing Table 11, we can see the scale "policy on the community forests management" Cronbach's alpha coefficient is 0.734 > 0.5 is a good ratio The Corrected ItemTotal Correlations are more than 0.3, so observed variables should be reached to perform further analysis * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "People's understanding of community forest management" Table 12: Reliability for the scale “People's understanding of community forest management" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted HB1 6.59 2.573 0.454 0.448 HB2 6.54 2.264 0.456 0.438 HB3 7.16 2.822 0.336 0.609 With three observed variables, Cronbach's Alpha coefficient of scale "People's understanding of community forest management" is 0.604> 0.5 It is considered a good ratio The correlation coefficient gross though not as high as in scale "policy community forest management" but are still more than 0.3 should meet the requirements In addition, HB3 variable is the lowest Corrected Item-Total Correlation that is 0.336 If it is removed, its Cronbach's Alpha coefficient will be rose from 0.604 up to 0.609 that is not too big a change Therefore, all variables are to carry out further analysis * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "The combination of community forest management" Observing Table 13, we can see the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of scale "The combination of community forest management" is 0.672 It is good coefficient The Corrected Item-Total Correlations are more than 0.3 so they should be reached to perform further analysis Table 13: Reliability for the scale “The combination of community forest management Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted PH1 5.88 1.938 0.486 0.576 PH2 5.95 1.931 0.506 0.548 PH3 5.78 2.197 0.464 0.604 * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "Protective Equipment for the management" Cronbach's alpha coefficient of Scale "protective equipment for the management” is 0.688 It is a good coefficient The Corrected Item-Total Correlation are greater than 0.3 so that gross so satisfactory Besides, if we exclude the observed variables in the scale the Cronbach's alpha coefficient is lower than the former Therefore, all variables were retained for subsequent analysis Table 14: Reliability for the scale “Protective Equipment for the management" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted TB1 6.15 1.563 0.529 0.561 TB2 6.00 1.645 0.528 0.564 TB3 6.07 1.751 0.454 0.656 * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "Traditional habits" Cronbach's alpha coefficient of scale "traditional habits" is 0.710 It is the second highest coefficient in the scales This coefficient is more than 0.5 so that is a good factor The Corrected Item-Total Correlation are greater than 0.3 that gross unsatisfactory and should have been retained to perform further analysis Table 15: Reliability for the scale “Traditional habits" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Item Deleted if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted TQ1 3.24 0.816 0.550 TQ2 3.12 0.802 0.550 * Inspection reliability for the independent variable "Benefit from forest management" Cronbach's alpha coefficient of scale "benefits from forest management" was 0.703 It’s also a good coefficient The Corrected Item-Total Correlations are greater than 0.3 that gross so satisfactory Besides, if we exclude the variables, Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the observed scale is even lower than the former Therefore, all variables were retained to perform further analysis Table 16: Reliability for the scale “Benefit from forest management" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Deleted LI1 6.73 2.753 0.504 0.633 LI2 6.40 2.557 0.506 0.629 LI3 6.97 2.413 0.552 0.570 * Inspection reliability for the dependent variable "Community forest management" Cronbach's alpha coefficient of scale "Community Forests Management" was 0.603 that is a good coefficient Its lowest Corrected Item-Total Correlation is 0.398 > 0.3 so that is satisfactory If observed variables is removed, Cronbach's alpha coefficient dropped from 0.603 to 0.528 that is not better The other coefficients have a similar situation Therefore, all variables were retained to perform further analysis Table 17: Reliability for the scale “Community forest management" Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance if Corrected Item-Total Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted QLR1 6.49 2.133 0.398 0.528 QLR2 6.61 2.133 0.441 0.458 QLR3 6.61 2.556 0.404 0.520 In conclusion, after testing the scales, we can see the scale is a good choice and no need to adjust 4.3 Correlation analysis After performing exploratory factor analysis, there are six independent factors (with 17 observed variables) and one independent factor (with three observed variables) were included in the model’s test The value factor is the average of the observed variable components Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the appropriateness of the components included in the regression model The results of the regression analysis used to test the hypotheses 4.3.1 Inspection of the correlation coefficient Inspection of the correlation coefficient used to test the linear relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable The correlation coefficients (r) indicate how tight linear relationship The more “r” close to 1, the higher the level of strict and r = indicates that the variables not have a linear relationship The inspection was carried out sides (2 - tailed) The correlation coefficient between variables with itself is 1, between the variables together are > According to the correlation matrix, the correlation coefficient between the independent variables and the dependent variable are significant at the 0.01 level The corresponding coefficients are: - "Benefits from forest management" variable and the dependent variable have the correlation coefficient as 0.577 This is the average correlation, but it is the highest degree of influence variable to the dependent variable in the model - "The combination of community forest management" variable and the dependent variable have correlation coefficient as 0.354 This correlation is weak, although it still shows the influence of this variable to the dependent variable - "Protective Equipment for the management" variable and the dependent variable have the correlation coefficient of 0.267 This is the lowest correlation coefficient in all the independent variables, and it also represents a weak influence on the "community forest management" - The correlation coefficient of "Policy on the management of community forests" variable and the dependent variable is 0.511 Influence of this independent variables the second strongest in the model This impact is more than 0.4 so that the average correlation - The correlation coefficient of "Traditional habits" variable and the dependent variable is 0.384 It also a weak correlation coefficient That shows the traditional habits of people in forest protection not affect strongly to "community forest management” - "Knowing the people on community forest management" variable may affect the dependent variable quite strongly The correlation coefficient is 0.506 Although it does not show a strong degree of influence, but it is also a major factor affecting the variable "community forest management" in the model In addition, the table also shows that the matrix of independent variables also has certain relations to each other That means independent variables can affect the others, which changed the community forests management in Ha Giang Province Table 18: Correlation matrix between the variables of the model Correlations QLR Pearson QLR LI PH TB CS TQ HB 0.577** 0.354** 0.267** 0.511** 0.384** 0.506** 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 Correlation Sig (2-tailed) LI N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.577** 0.257** 0.116 0.374** 0.265** 0.309** Correlation PH Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.001 00.152 000 00.001 0.000 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.354** 0.257** 0.015 0.270** 0.021 0.262** Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.001 0.850 0.001 0.801 0.001 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.267** 0.116 0.015 0.088 0.201* -0.014 Sig (2-tailed) 0.001 0.152 0.850 0.281 0.013 0.862 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.511** 0.374** 0.270** 0.088 0.188* 0.356** Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 001 0.281 00.020 0.000 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.384** 0.265** 0.021 0.201* 0.188* 0.148 Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.001 0.801 0.013 0.020 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 153 Pearson 0.506** 0.309** 0.262** -0.014 0.356** 0.148 Sig (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.862 0.000 0.068 N 153 153 153 153 153 153 Correlation TB Correlation CS Correlation TQ Correlation HB 0.068 Correlation 153 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) Matrix table 18 shows the hypothesis is not rejected and can be included in the model to explain the dependent variable 4.3.2 Regression Analysis Regression analysis was performed with independent variables included: Benefit from managed forests (LI), the coordination in community forest management (PH), protective equipment for the management (TB) Policy on community forest management (CS), the traditional habits (TQ), people's understanding of community forest management (HB), and the dependent variable is a community forest management (QLR) Values of the independent variables were averaged based on the observed variable component of these independent variables The value of the dependent variable is the average value of the observed variables on community forest management Analysis is performed by the Enter method The variables are taken at the same time to see the relevance of the variables Results of regression analysis as follows: Table 19: Assessment of fit of the model Variables Entered/Removed Model Variables Entered Variables Removed Method HB, TB, TQ, PH, CS, LI Enter a All requested variables entered b Dependent Variable: QLR Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std Error of the Estimate 0.769a 0.592 0.575 0.44896 a Predictors: (Constant), HB, TB, TQ, PH, CS, LI b Dependent Variable: QLR The results in Table 19 shows regression models provide relatively consistent with 0.05 significance Adjusted coefficient R2 = 0.575 means that there are about 57.5% variance of community forest management that is explained by the six independent variables This figure is not too high but still sufficient to meet the requirements of conformity assessment model (is adjusted coefficient R2 must be greater than 50%.) Table 20: Testing ANOVA ANOVA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig Regression 42.664 7.111 35.277 0.000a Residual 29.429 146 0.202 Total 72.093 152 a Predictors: (Constant), HB, TB, TQ, PH, CS, LI b Dependent Variable: QLR F-test used in analysis of variance table is allowed to test the hypothesis of fit of linear regression models overall The audit reviewed a linear relationship between the dependent variable and the independent variables Significance must be less than 5%, then the model is considered acceptable In the ANOVA table (Table 20), we see very little value sig (sig = 0.00) that means error of 0% Regression models is suitable and can be used ANOVA testing results show that the F value = 35.277 (sig = 0.000) That represents the fit of the model was built This suggests that the relationship between the linear regression of independent variables with the dependent variable in the model In addition, we consider whether multi-collinearity should be occurring in the model or not VIF coefficient is used to examine the multi-collinearity in the model The rule is that the VIF less than signs of multi - collinearity (Weight & Ngoc, 2005) In the table 21, the VIF value of the largest variable as 1.301 is quite small (less than 2) Therefore, multi-collinearity not affects results of the model Sig of the biggest factors of "The combination of community forest management" variable is 0.01< 0.05, so that all variables are accepted Table 21: Regression Results in the Model Coefficients Model Unstandardized Standardized Coefficients Coefficients B Std Error (Constant) -0.737 0.303 LI 0.284 0.055 PH 0.145 TB t Sig Collinearity Statistics Beta Tolerance VIF - 0.016 0.308 2.434 5.111 0.000 0.769 1.301 0.059 0.139 2.458 0.015 0.872 1.147 0.205 0.063 0.178 3.272 0.001 0.948 1.054 CS 0.201 0.058 0.211 3.493 0.001 0.770 1.299 TQ 0.159 0.049 0.183 3.255 0.001 0.884 1.132 HB 0.260 0.055 0.275 4.681 0.000 0.810 1.235 a Dependent Variable: QLR The magnitude of Beta of variables are arranged in the following: LI> HB> CS> TQ> TB> PH In which, the most influential variable is "benefit from forest management" and the weakest influence one is "The coordination of community forest management" Results showed that to promote the community forest management effectiveness, district leaders need to have the appropriate strategies to impact each factor They should strongly impact on the factors with large correlation coefficient and not need to adjust the factors with correlation coefficient 4.3.3 Results of regression analysis The regression equation showing the relationship between community forest management in Quan Ba District, Ha Giang Province and factors: Benefit from managed forests (LI), the coordination in community forest management (PH), protective equipment for the management (TB) Policy on community forest management (CS), the traditional habits (TQ), people's understanding of community forest management (HB) through the following equation (equation constants removed): Y = 0,308* X1 + 0,139* X2 + 0,178*X3 + 0,211*X4 + 0,183*X5 + 0,275*X6 Among them: Y: Community forest management in Quan Ba District, Ha Giang Province X1: Benefit from managed forests X2: The coordination in community forest management X3: Protective equipment for the management X4: Policy on community forest management X5: The traditional habits X6: People's understanding of community forest management Conclusions and discussion Base on the literature review and consultation with experts, the researchers showed factors that primarily affect community forest management in Ha Giang The model has independent variables and dependent variable The data is collected by the survey with Ha Giang provincial managers, people participate in community forest management The scale has been assessed through Cronbach’s Alpha test The results give good coefficients that confirm the correctness of the model The research results showed that respondents were mostly well aware of community forest management They said that the influencing factors built in the model have a strong impact to community forest management in Ha Giang province However, there are still many factors ineffective that require local governments to have correct views in developing strategies to improve community forest management here The research results show that there are many factors affecting the community forests management at different levels Since then, local governments will have appropriate strategies to promote effective community forest management The authors offer some following recommendations: Firstly, the State as well as local governments need to redefine the legal position of village communities in forest management It is necessary to address the shortcomings in legal documents related to the legal position, rights and obligations of village communities to promote the role of community forest management In fact, forest protection and development cannot be based only on administrative, enforcement and sanctioning measures, but on people (village and hamlet communities) based on protection contracts with a satisfactory benefit mechanism At the same time, local governments should enact policies to benefit consistent with the principles and techniques of finance or local practices Benefit sharing mechanism to be based on the highest principles promote the initiative and creativity of the direct protection of forest development, avoid turning them into employees, so new sustainable and effective The current state budget for planting, protecting and developing forest is just a temporary solution, only supportive, inadequate and not lasting Secondly, the foundation for land and forest allocation is the planning of forest land management and using From the reality of localities where forests exist, people and grassroots officials play an important role in planning They are more knowledgeable than anyone with specific local conditions Therefore, planning work needs to be maintained at the commune level, even with consultations from the village community On the basis of the contents of the Ha Giang Socio-Economic Development Master Plan up to 2025, the orientation to 2030, the province should continue to build and supplement and adjust in time the allocation forest for community planning Particularly, it is necessary to pay due attention to the planning of new rural construction at the commune level in a way that is suitable to the reality associated with land and forest allocation and development and community forest management Third, the province needs to support techniques of planting and protecting community forests to people involved in forest management Updating new science and technology through training helps people manage and exploit forests more effectively Fourthly, the province should strengthen the inspection and examination of the implementation of community forest management in the district starting from management planning, management organization and results of forest exploitation and protection to meet the requirements of practical requirements The situation of illegal exploitation of forests, misuse of purposes for resolutely resolving thoroughly References Arnold, J.E.M., Jongma, J (1978) Fuelwood and charcoal in developing countries Unasylva, 29(118), 2-9 Arnold, J.E.M., Stewart, W.C (1991) Common property resource management in India Tropical Forestry Papers 24, Oxford Forestry Institute, University of Oxford, England, 15 30 Burda, D., Curran, F., Gale, M., M’Gonigle (1997), Forest in Trust: Reforming British Columbia’s Forest Tenure System for Ecosystem and Community health Report Series R97-2 Victoria, BC: Eco-research Chair in Environmental Law and Policy, Faculty of Law and Environmental, University of Victory, US, FAO (1978), Forestry for local community development, Forestry Paper 7, FAO, Rome, Italy, 26 Hair et al (2006), The application of structural equation modelling in information systems research, Information Systems Frontiers, No 6, 325 - 340 Hardin, G (1968), The tragedy of the commons Science, 162 Herb (1991), Seeing the forest among the trees: The case for wholistic forest use Winlaw, BC: Canada Polestar Calendars, Canada, 77 Hoang, T., Chu, N.M.N (2005), Analysis of research data with SPSS, Thong Ke Publishing House, Hanoi, Vietnam, pp 25-60 Hoelter (1983), Structural equation modelling with AMOS: basic concepts, application and programming Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc USA, 3-15 MARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development) (2006), Community forestry - Forestry industry handbook, Vietnam, 3-5 MNRT (Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism) (2007), Community Based Forest Management Guidelines., Forestry and Beekeeping Division, January 2007, 67 Nagashima (1970), Country - of- origin image: measurement and cross-national testing, Journal of Business research, Volume 58, Issue 1, January 2005, 103-106 National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (2004), Law on Forest Protection and Development on April 1, 2004, 3-4 Nguyen, B.N (2009), Community forest management in Vietnam: Current situation, problems and solutions, Proceedings of the national workshop on community forest management - Community forest management in Vietnam: Policies and practices, FGLG project, Hanoi, - 20 Nguyen, V.T (2004), General Forestry Curriculum, Agriculture Publishing House, Vietnam, 54 - 82 Nunally, J & Burnstein, I.H (1994), Psychometric theory., NY: McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 1-55 Poffenberger, M (2003), Communities and Forest management in Southeast Asia, WG CFM, Switzerland, 147 - 154 Quach, D (2005) Learn new regulations on forest protection and forest development, Labor Publish, Vietnam, 11-43 Swiss Association for Development and Cooperation (2005), Guidance on community forest management techniques, Helvetia Vietnam, 27-42 Tran, V.C., Nguyen, H.S., Phan, M.S., Nguyen, H.Q., Chu, D.Q., Le, M.T (2006) Chapter "Sustainable forest management”, Forestry industry handbook Program to support forestry sector and partners of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, 102-130 Vo, D.T (2012), Benefit mechanism in community forest management in Vietnam, Workshop on natural forest management based on people's rights, Center for Community and Environment Initiative (C&E), - 11 ... promote community LI3 forest management Community forest management 7.1 Quan Ba District, Ha Giang province has been implementing community QL1 forest management 7.2 Community Forest Management in. .. showed that respondents were mostly well aware of community forest management They said that the influencing factors built in the model have a strong impact to community forest management in Ha Giang. .. promote community- based forest management 6.2 Residents are doing all participate in forest management while promoting LI2 community forest management 6.3 Forest management will keep the forest has